Comments on: Watch Very Cool Video of a Hot Engine

By: Jirka

Jirka — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 12:26:06 +0000

Does anybody know what's the difference between this CECE and SSME which Space Shuttle use? Both use liquid oxygen and hydrogen, both have cooled nozzle etc…

By: Jomark Osabel

Jomark Osabel — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 06:13:21 +0000

Its kinda weird to use this kind of technology for jet propulsion but i guess it works so be it.

By: thenmomdo

thenmomdo — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 02:54:30 +0000

If engines of this type have to be sensitivly watched on earth at our tepid temps, do you think they would react to the coldest temps, on cold planets, the same way on the cold gas giants like saturn or jupiter? Cold engines work better in cold environments? Make them operate not here but on the cold saturns or their moons. I feel they would get better results there. (On cold atmospheric planets). Start at the Antarctic and find out.

By: RetardedFishFrog

RetardedFishFrog — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 00:48:44 +0000

My amp goes to 11.

By: Conic

Conic — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 03:39:49 +0000

Boy pretty scary choice to use complex cryogenics for landing on the moon. There is a reason storables were used last time, with an ultra simple engine… We dont want people stranded on the moon or to have them crash land.

By: Frank Glover

Frank Glover — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:17:42 +0000

"This is sweet, but would the fact that engine components need to be kept at cryogenic temperatures limit it to extra-atmospheric use?"

Not really. The Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME) is also a hydrogen-oxygen burner, as are the engines in the Delta IV first stage. (and many other rockets use liquid oxygen as the oxidizer, which is still pretty cold stuff, though not so much as liquid hydrogen)

And the CECE is a modified RL-10, the first production LOX/H2 engine, first designed in the early 1960s for the Centaur upper stage. A throttleable version, modified for sea-level operatios was also used in the DC-X program to test single stage to orbit technologies…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RL-10

I had always hoped that the Centaur/RL-10 might one day be modified into a reuseable orbit-to-orbit space tug, including a Lunar landing capability..I may yet sort of get my wish.

By: Vicky Pollard

Vicky Pollard — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 07:37:28 +0000

Linux — use VLC, is plays .asx files just fine and it's GNU GPL

By: Maxwell

Maxwell — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:41:58 +0000

I think the point is that it's an engine designed for the hardships of space. A place where hot and cold simply don't work in the ways we landsiders are used to.

By: Linux

Linux — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:40:48 +0000

Windows Media Player – I am so sick of the U.S. Government using my tax dollars to sanction microcrap corporation.

By: Bill L.

Bill L. — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:12:00 +0000

This is sweet, but would the fact that engine components need to be kept at cryogenic temperatures limit it to extra-atmospheric use?

By: Antonio

Antonio — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 21:06:33 +0000

Actually, when space shuttle pilots hear "Go at throttle up", it means they have passed max q and the main engines are going to throttle from 65% to 104%…

By: Emission Nebula

Emission Nebula — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:57:45 +0000

That was awesome. Ive got to get me one

By: Jorge

Jorge — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:56:53 +0000

Ah. I see. Thanks for clearing this up for me.

By: Flonkbob

Flonkbob — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:30:37 +0000

@Jorge:

The engine's rated capacity is lower than it's absolute capacity. It is generally the difference between the 'safe' maximum and the mechanical maximum.

By: Eric Near Buffalo

Eric Near Buffalo — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:04:10 +0000

@ Jorge:

My guess is they estimated the engine was only so powerful, but under testing they found that it actually went above what they had predicted.

By: Jorge

Jorge — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 18:27:41 +0000

How do you get 104 percent of an engine's potential? Isn't that like eating 104 grams of a 100 gram chop? Where do the extra 4 grams come from?

I was under the impression that all engines always worked under their potential. No?

By: Eric Near Buffalo

Eric Near Buffalo — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 17:09:22 +0000

That's so cool.

Literally.